Finally got around to The Witch. I can't decide what works so well about it. They don't try to make the supernatural element ambiguous, but i was still surprised by the ending. I'm imagining someone pitching the story and it sounds ridiculous, but it totally works.
I guess the whole time I was thinking it was one witch with limited influence, piling mischief on top of the family's self-inflicted troubles.
I did think they maybe showed too much of human Phillip. Thought he looked a bit cheesy and would've worked better if we just saw his hand on her shoulder.
Although I agree "the supernatural elements are real" is the best interpretation, the director added ergot corn rot to scenes, which is a hallucinogenic fungus, so you can choose to believe it was all in their minds.
Another ambiguous aspect of the film is the ending. You can argue the girl becoming a witch is a good feminist ending because she leaves her oppressive male dominated society behind and chooses her own life.
Although I agree "the supernatural elements are real" is the best interpretation, the director added ergot corn rot to scenes, which is a hallucinogenic fungus, so you can choose to believe it was all in their minds.
Another ambiguous aspect of the film is the ending. You can argue the girl becoming a witch is a good feminist ending because she leaves her oppressive male dominated society behind and chooses her own life.
they were all going mad - didn't know about the fungus at the time - but seemed like the scenes with the witch by herself in the woods didn't allow for it, or at least there was a little of both. I suppose she could just be a homicidal old woman in the woods, but then they see her or a very similar witch later. Wonder if it's edited in such a way that it could be a dream. Don't remember the context now. The theft of the baby seemed a little too quick to not have some witchcraft involved.
Although I agree "the supernatural elements are real" is the best interpretation, the director added ergot corn rot to scenes, which is a hallucinogenic fungus, so you can choose to believe it was all in their minds.
Another ambiguous aspect of the film is the ending. You can argue the girl becoming a witch is a good feminist ending because she leaves her oppressive male dominated society behind and chooses her own life.
they were all going mad - didn't know about the fungus at the time - but seemed like the scenes with the witch by herself in the woods didn't allow for it, or at least there was a little of both. I suppose she could just be a homicidal old woman in the woods, but then they see her or a very similar witch later. Wonder if it's edited in such a way that it could be a dream. Don't remember the context now. The theft of the baby seemed a little too quick to not have some witchcraft involved.
In interviews with the director Robert Eggers you can tell he believes it's supposed to be real despite not directly stating it. The editing choices you note support that interpretation. I think he added the ergot to offer fans something to discuss. He's very much a "the movie is whatever you interpret" type of director.
As I noted before, he did the same thing with the ending. After a few re-watches I believe, from the directors perspective, it's a stealth happy ending, but its completely reasonable to think it's a tragedy. A tragedy/warning is certainly the Puritan point of view in the texts/lore he based the movie on.
